Representation by Historic England (Historic England)
- Date submitted
- 21 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
PROPOSALS FOR A STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE – INCLUDING WAREHOUSING – ON LAND SOUTH OF ELMSTHORPE, BETWEEN THE LEICESTER TO HINCKLEY RAILWAY AND THE M69 MOTORWAY (KNOWN AS HINCKLEY NATIONAL RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE (HNRFI)) AND ASSOCIATED HIGHWAY WORKS HISTORIC ENGLAND REPRESENTATION UNDER SECTION 56(2) OF THE PLANNING ACT 2008 Application TR0550007 Our ref: PL00762062 Thank you for consulting Historic England on the above scheme of works. Based on the information provided, please find our comments below. HISTORIC ENGLAND ADVICE The proposals comprise the development of the Hinckley National Rail Freight Interchange, with associated ground and demolition works, highway works, warehousing, access and landscaping. The proposal would negatively impact the setting of a number of designated heritage assets. We do not intend to comment on the conservation areas or grade II listed buildings. We would instead refer you to the local planning authorities’ Conservation Officers on these matters. With regards to the non-designated archaeology, we would refer you to Leicestershire County Council’s Historic & Natural Environment Team. 1) Previous Advice & Requests for Further Information Historic England provided advice on these proposals at the scoping and screening stage in April 2018 (Our ref: PL00345802) and December 2020 (Our Ref: PL00725542). We provide a Section 42 in response to the Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PIER) in April 2022 (Our Ref: PL00762062). The submitted Environmental Statement (ES) has noted and responded to our April 2022 comments. We raised concerns with the impact of the scheme upon the setting of several designated heritage assets, and the level of information provided to assess this. These designated heritage assets comprise: • Elmesthorpe Church ruins scheduled monument (List Entry No. 1005076); • Grade I Listed Church of St Mary, Barwel (List Entry No. 1074229); • Grade II* listed Church of St Catherine, Burbage (List Entry No. 1295212); and • Grade II* listed Church of St Simon and St Jude, Earl Shilton (List Entry No. 1074259). We are satisfied that sufficient further information has now been provided as requested, including additional descriptions and heritage specific photos and visualisations. This has better evidenced and clarified the assessment of impact, considering intervisibility, kinetic views and the relationship between the assets and their surrounding landscapes. The ES has also clarified where impacts beyond visual (such as noise or light pollution) might occur and provided more detail on how the embedded mitigation responds to the individual designated heritage assets. 2) Impact of the Scheme In summary, the ES has concluded that the significance of these designated heritage assets is predicted to be affected by the proposed development through adverse changes within their wider settings. Depending upon the asset being discussed, the ES notes that there would be impacts on the ability to appreciate sites in the context of their historically associated agricultural settings, appreciate how they feature in views from the wider landscape, and / or a loss of localised views towards these assets from land within or surrounding the application site. It concludes that this would represent noticeable changes in the settings of the assets, expected to result in between negligible and small changes to significance. There would be permanent minor adverse effects on these assets of high sensitivity. The ES also detailed the limitations of the embedded mitigation. Whilst landscaping proposals seek to screen the development and minimise its visual impact, the size of the development and elevated nature of some of the heritage assets means this mitigation is not expected to result in any notable reduction in adverse effects on views towards or across the application site. Similarly, given the nature of the proposed development and spread of warehouse buildings, there is no specific mitigation that can be employed to limit the loss of views towards the heritage assets from within and across the application site 3) HE Position Historic England does not object to the application. We welcome the additional information that has been provided. We note the broad conclusions of the ES that the proposals would result in adverse changes to settings and significance. Based on this and the information provided, it is our view that the proposals would have a low, but appreciable, level of less-than-substantial harm (as per the National Policy Statement for National Networks) to the significance of the four designated heritage assets listed above. This harm requires clear and convincing justification, and should be outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal (NPSNN 5.131 – 5.134). RECOMMENDATION Historic England has no objection to the application on heritage grounds. However, the proposals would result in some harm to the significance of several highly graded designated heritage assets. In Examining this application, you must be satisfied that there is clear and convincing justification for this harm, and that the level of harm is outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme. We recommend that you take these representations into account in the Examination of this application. We would be grateful if you could please inform us of any decisions and send us a copy of your report(s) at the earliest opportunity. Please contact me if we can be of further assistance. Yours sincerely, Nick Carter Inspector of Ancient Monuments (Redacted)@HistoricEngland.org.uk